Hacker News Reader

Comment by sls | Hacker News Reader

Have you ever actually looked at the Schrödinger equation? [1] It's pretty simple. If you've had freshman physics, you can learn enough to derive it in a matter of days or at most weeks. There's not a lot of room in there for the kind of thing you are suggesting.

It's much more plausible that the uncomfortable human-centric thing we need to let go is the idea that our perceptions about macroscopic reality should be indicative of how things actually are.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrodinger_equation

View on HN

The system of epicycles was made of pretty simple, easy things: circles. It's when they were combined things went complicated.

Same with Schrödinger equation: it's very simple for one particle in an empty Universe, but things go more complicated when more particles are considered.

There is no guarantee that a different approach can replace QM and describe things in a simpler way. But I suspect that attempts to look for such approaches are not useless.

What do you mean by "derive" the Schrödinger equation? As best as I know, there is no "derivation" beyond some analogy with the classical wave equation. It's an equation penned down by Schrödinger, motivated by the classical wave equation and insights from de broglie's theory.

I'd love to see a derivation if it exists.

I have in mind things like this [1]. I no longer have my undergraduate text or notes but I recall going through a similar exercise.

[1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0610121.pdf

Indeed, early progress with QM in the first place required letting go of some expectations that were based on macroscopic phenomena. There was a certain effort to clarify those expectations so they could be gotten rid of. This is, at least, what I remember being taught about it.

So, maybe it's time for another round. ;-)

Circles are also simpler than ellipses. Maybe that's a clue. Maybe we need a more complicated equation that makes the phenomena more understandable.

EDIT: To stretch the metaphor a bit more. Maybe QFT is the analogous of the solar system described with epicycles.

That would, indeed, be an uncomfortable thing to let go of, since they are our direct perceptions.

Relativity tells us things get weird at high velocities, but our daily perception is basically correct. Quantum theory seems to suggest that solid, tangible reality isn't at all like our day-to-day experience. That's a pretty decent leap to ask of people.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com